• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Metacritic bemoans 2012's lack of quality

Triple A games have been really disappointing to me this year, but pc gaming is definitely rocking it hard. Out with the old, in with the new I say. It's as simple as the big guys in the industry sucking the life out of the popular games until a new wizard with plenty of life appears out of thin air. And the cycle continues, and metacritic still sucks.
 
The core problem is the reviews. I know they are just opinions but a great many of them can be so easily swayed. The aggregating is fine, but the thing being aggregated is not fine which renders Metacritic useless for all but the most quickest glances.
 
Well it's like anything else really. the shit that gets the best reviews in films and music, is often not what is the best.


Look, to me it's been a terrific year. For Planetside 2 and Guild Wars 2 alone, I felt that online gaming took a colossal leap forward!

It's the same sites that keep building hype for the next call of duty, madden and Halo, that scream foul when they receive more of it, and it ain't new. It's great to have smaller niche titles taking center stage like Mark of the Ninja and The Walking Dead.

How can that be bad? because some shooter series for the 4th year in a row didnt brought down the house with small nifty touches like innovative blood spatter effects and extra sized cornyness on the military-gi-joe gunho story? sppfftttt.




People have some weird feelings about sequels. cant live with them, cant live without em!
 
Metacritic aggregator work just fine imo,look at the other categories.Games have always had inflated scores and that's here to stay sadly.People just harp on the website because it brings to light what's normal in the industry.
 
Crazy talk. We have never had as much variety in gaming as we have right now. The Walking Dead won GOTY. Dark Souls was ported to pc after a petition. KS is bringing old style gaming to the masses. Tons of indies are finding success. The mod community on pc is an embarrassment of riches. Pretty much every "AAAA" (yes the extra A is a joke) are bigger than ever - you are pretty much guaranteed to be entertained with that type of games. X-COM came back and didn't suck. THQ didn't completely disappear and still has a chance of keeping afloat.

To quote Louis C.K. Everything is amazing, and nobody is happy.
I think there are less homogenous games coming out, so the scores are less homogenous as well. And I'm okay with that.
 
videogame reviews are crap.

either:

they have some sort of checklist. where they add or deduct points based on having certain features say multiplayer or what have you.

or they review things based on what they think their readers might think, thats why sequels to popular games often get better score. And they simply dont want to upset their fanboy readers.

or they dont want to upset the advertisers.

Or its a combination of all.
 
Heard this one PlayerOne podcast, there seems to be a disconnect between reviewers and individuals like the ones in the GAF community. Two examples of well reviewed games that have kind of rang hollow to may are Halo 4 and Diablo 3. Mass Effect 3 is also a great example of this. I think we are nearing the point were the 10 point scale might not still apply.
 
Walking Dead's 9 review score shouldn't count.

Persona 4 Golden is the real winner this year, meaning the best game of the year is on the Vita, the best console.
 
Metacritic aggregator work just fine imo,look at the other categories.Games have always had inflated scores and that's here to stay sadly.People just harp on the website because it brings to light what's normal in the industry.
Well there is something wrong with Metacritic itself and its methods as it just pronounced a game to be GOTY based on the aggregate review score of 9 reviews.
 
How did the 360 have 39 more games reviewed than the PS3 in 2012? Would have thought they'd be near identical.
 
It's true though. Presentation and polish do more for a game's overall score than fun factor. It's been that way for a long time.

Recent example - Nier

Also, imbalanced in the players favor vs even/imbalanced against the player.

Or Narrative vs joy of playing.

Hedge your bets about critical reception safely from the base of tested knowledge today!
 
I'd wager this has little to do with quality and more to do with a shift we're seeing away from the 7-9, 100 point review scale. This is one of the reasons I think Super Mario Galaxy and Grand Theft Auto IV will remain at the top of the all-time lists--not because they're the best games ever, but because I doubt we'll ever see such ubiquitous score inflation across review outlets.
 
Dear God! Are you really comparing the two games? Are you really refering to some kind of rating for Journey?
No i was really comparing the reaction that ME3 got when it was released, the sour aftertaste it left and how it is still a highly divisive game as opposed to Journey which was received with near universal praise. And yet ME3 seems to have gotten the better score.
 
Don't worry guys, we just need shiny new graphics, which for a couple years will convince critics games are more amazing than they actually are. Then we'll all acclimate quickly to the new bells and whistles afforded by next gen hardware, find some extremely minor IQ issue to latch onto and blow out of proportion, and the cycle will start anew.
 
No i was really comparing the reaction that ME3 got when it was released, the sour aftertaste it left and how it is still a highly divisive game as opposed to Journey which was received with near universal praise. And yet ME3 seems to have gotten the better score.
Journey shouldn't be scored because it's not a game per se, it's an experienced as believers say. There are some graphics, some sound, some story, some everything in Journey but it's something that lasts several hours, has minimalistic gameplay and story and is purely stimulative for the imagination. You can't judge Journey with normal criteria imo.
And I'm not sure you're right with that universal praise. It's a very divisive game. Some people fell in love, some were disapointed.

Scores don't matter honestly, we all know how scores can inflate in both cases : moneyhats and/or hype, will to see video games considered as a new form of art.
 
Waaa we killed off uncountable creative teams and talents with our completely ridiculous score agitation system and now we're bemoaning the lack of completely arbitrary scores on our good-as-arbitrary measuring system and pointing to a lack of quality of games when it is a much an indictment on the slowly changing world of games journalism.

Please.
 
Journey shouldn't be scored because it's not a game per se, it's an experienced as believers say. There are some graphics, some sound, some story, some everything in Journey but it's something that lasts several hours, has minimalistic gameplay and story and is purely stimulative for the imagination. You can't judge Journey with normal criteria imo.
And I'm not sure you're right with that universal praise. It's a very divisive game. Some people fell in love, some were disapointed.

Scores don't matter honestly, we all know how scores can inflate in both cases : moneyhats and/or hype, will to see video games considered as a new form of art.
Bleh, Journey is just as much a game as Mass Effect 3 or Super Mario. It's just a different kind of game, less emphasis on some things & more in others. It's silly to have such strict boundaries of what make a game and what doesn't.

Though, I do agree Journey shouldn't be scored, but I also think NO game should be scored. The text of the review itself is almost always more important than some number slapped after it.
 
Funky Barn shouldn't be one of the lowest scoring games in 2012, it isn't great, but isn't bad either.

But better than games like Resident Evil 6 and Ninja Gaiden 3.
 
I don't get it, this is supposed to be a parody post making fun of the Vita fans on this board pushing their agenda in every topic? Or are you actually being serious.
I'm like 99% sure he's being serious.

And why is disliking the Vita an "agenda"? As if there aren't legitimate reasons to criticize it as a gaming platform.
 
Regarding portables, Vita haz no gamez confirmed. (btw, Minis are counted as PSP games but they also work on Vita)
Metacritic said:
PlayStation Vita / PSP

Three out of 2012's four highest-scoring handheld games (not including iOS) were found on the PlayStation Vita, and the first-year platform also edged out both Nintendo handhelds in average Metascore for 2012 releases. The Vita also managed one 90+ release: Persona 4 Golden, a port of the PS2 game Shin Megami Tensei: Persona 4.

The number of scored 2012 releases for Nintendo's 3DS and Sony's Vita were virtually identical (77 vs. 76), but nearly 45% of the Vita's games received positive reviews compared to just 31% of the 3DS titles. Nintendo, of course, still has the edge where it counts: in hardware and software sales.

3DS 2012 Avg. Metascore 66.2
DS 2012 Avg. Metascore 67.6
Wii 2012 Avg. Metascore 67.9
Wii U 2012 Avg. Metascore 68.6
360 2012 Avg. Metascore 69.5
Vita 2012 Avg. Metascore 69.7
PS3 2012 Avg. Metascore 70.3
PC 2012 Avg. Metascore 70.3
PSP 2012 Avg. Metascore 71.2 *
* = Includes Minis, also compatible with PS3 and Vita

http://www.metacritic.com/feature/best-video-games-of-2012?page=1
http://www.metacritic.com/feature/best-video-games-of-2012?page=2
 
Regarding portables, Vita haz no gamez confirmed. (btw, Minis are counted as PSP games but they also work on Vita)

Yeah, the Vita smashed it this year. I think Metacritic summed up the enthusiast mindset perfectly however:

Nintendo, of course, still has the edge where it counts: in hardware and software sales.

Good sales > good games.
 
Top Bottom